Colorado Senators Michael Bennet and Mark Udall lauded a deficit-reduction plan set forth by a bipartisan coalition of senators known as the “gang of six” after they, along with about 50 senators, were briefed on it this afternoon in Washington.

“In town halls across our state, Coloradans tell me they want a plan that materially reduces the deficit, shows we are all in it together and is bipartisan,” Bennet said in a statement. “The plan should also reassure the capital markets that the paper they’ve bought is worth what they paid for it and is not at risk.”

Bennet says the “gang of six plan” meets those broad goals and would reduce the country’s deficit by close to $4 trillion.

Realistically the plan aims to cut $3.7 trillion over 10 years, by raising roughly $1 trillion in new revenue. Moreover, the plan is based on the bipartisan recommendations of the Erskin Bowles and Alan Simpson commission (also bipartisan) on reducing deficit reduction, which was released last fall.

“From the beginning, I’ve said that it is imperative that we work together on a plan to reduce our mounting debt while meeting our nation’s obligation to pay its bill,” said Udall in a statement. “Now more than ever, Republicans and Democrats have to come together to find a balanced, bipartisan proposal that ensures our budget isn’t balanced solely on the backs of middle-class families.”

President Obama, who for weeks has urged Congress to come up with a plan before the Aug. 2 deadline where the United States would default on its debts, praised the plan calling it a “significant step.”

Read more in tomorrow’s Denver Post about Bennet and Udall’s thoughts on the “gang of six.”

Ken Buck, former U.S. Senate candidate, has founded a group to help address the national deficit.

Ken Buck, last year’s Republican nominee for U.S. Senate here in Colorado, is back in the headlines as he’s founded a new group called Balance America.

In a news release, it appears the group was created as Congress “wrestles with dangerous deficits as far as the eye can see, and leaders in both parties are calling for a constitutional amendment to require balanced budgets.”

Buck, who is the Weld County District Attorney, believes the time has come for Colorado and other states to pressure Washington to act. And he believes his newly founded group is the answer.

On June 13 at 6:30 p.m. Buck will lead a discussion at Colorado Christian University’s Beckman Center to discuss his new group.

Democratic Sens. Michael Bennet, left, and Mark Udall address a deficit forum in denver via video conference on Friday. The pair were unable to attend as negotiations on the federal budget continued in Washington into the night. (photo courtesy Sen. Udall's office)

A bipartisan forum to address the federal deficit problem in Denver Friday was supposed to be headlined by Democratic Sens. Michael Bennet and Mark Udall. But the pair was stuck Washington while Congress tried to avert a looming government shutdown over federal spending.

In remarks prior to the forum at the University of Colorado-Denver, Bennet urged panelists via a Skype video call to have an honest conversation and to disregard what cable news channels they prefer to watch in order to accomplish that goal.

“It’s great to be with you, at least virtually, and I can’t get over the irony of how we find ourselves stuck in Washington while we’re supposed to be having a conversation – a thoughtful conversation – about the fiscal condition of this country,” he said.

“I think we’re both willing to say that we’re willing to lose in the next election cycle — though Michael has six years to consider that and I have four — to get this job done,” said Udall.

Former Colorado U.S. Sen. Gary Hart, D-Colo., and current co-chair of the President Obama’s bi-partisan deficit commission Alan Simpson, R-Wyo., then led a panel intertwined with local CEO’s, military veterans and small business owners to discuss the nation’s fiscal condition.

Sen. Hart said there are certain key areas of focus when it comes to the federal deficit: social security, Medicare, Medicad and the military.

“Those are the key components,” said Hart “You have to deal with each of those things.”

The panel was moderated by Maya MacGuineas, president of Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget a bipartisan nonprofit organization in Washington, D.C.

Last year, the deficit commission proposed a comprehensive plan that called for eliminating almost $4 trillion in national debt. Bennet and Udall have called for the proposal to come to Congress for debate and an up or down vote, according to a release.

Here’s something to consider alongside today’s news that Bush and Obama now are working together to free up the second half of the Treasury’s $700 billion bailout for the financial system: the deficit.

Yes, plenty of economists advocate deficit spending during recessionary times, but it’s no sure thing. Obama’s own advisers have published research in the past that questions the wisdom of trying to time a stimulus package to reverse hard times, as New York Times David Brooks explained recently.

And some question just how much bang for the buck you actually get with government spending already far exceeding revenues. In a Bloomberg column today, economist Kevin Hassett, who advised the Treasury during both the former Bush and Clinton administrations – and who also advised the McCain campaign – sums up some findings about the deficit that surely make the business-minded nervous.

Like this little observation about the projected federal $1.2 trillion – which doesn’t include the $800 billion Obama says he wants for his stimulus package: “The whole world’s military spending in 2006 totaled a little less than $1.2 trillion,” Hassett writes. “So the next year’s U.S. deficit could cover that and still have $500 billion left over for building bridges.”

Hassett points out that when our current president was first elected, “total government spending was about $1.7 trillion. In other words, the difference between federal outlays and federal revenue this year will be bigger than the entire government was as recently as 2000.”

The problem with this out-of-control spending is that every time a new benchmark for spending gets set, government rarely goes back and reduces budgets.

“While advocates of Keynesian-style stimulus are correct that this economy is terrible enough to warrant dramatic action, it is hard to understand how such a fiscal path might help,” Hassett says.

“The only sensible path is for the U.S. to put its long-term fiscal house in order,” Hassett says. “Without that, this year’s stimulus will likely be a historic flop.”

Joey Bunch has been a reporter for 28 years, including the last 12 at The Denver Post. For various newspapers he has covered the environment, water issues, politics, civil rights, sports and the casino industry.